[R-sig-Geo] regression-kriging and co-kriging

[Edzer Pebesma]

Hard to tell from your script. Maybe give a reproducible example?

On 8/6/19 1:07 PM, Emanuele Barca wrote:
> Dear  r-sig-geo friends,
> 
> I produced two maps garnered in the following way:
> 
> # for regression-kriging
> Piezo.map <-autoKrige(LivStat ~  Z, input_data = mydata.sp, new_data
> = covariates,  model = "Ste")
> 
> Piezork.pred <- Piezo.map$krige_output$var1.pred
> Piezork.coords <- Piezo.map$krige_output using coords
> Piezork.out <- as.data.frame(cbind(Piezork.coords, Piezork.pred))
> colnames(Piezork.out)[1:2] <- c("X", "Y")
> coordinates(Piezork.out) = ~ X + Y
> gridded(Piezork.out) <- TRUE
> 
> spplot(Piezork.out, main = list(label = "R-k Hydraulic head", cex = 1.5))
> 
> #for co-kriging
> g <- gstat(id = "Piezo", formula = LivStat ~ 1, data = mydata.sp, set
> = list(nocheck = 1))
> g <- gstat(g, id = "Z", formula = Z ~ 1, data = mydata.sp, set =
> list(nocheck = 1))
> 
> v.g <- variogram(g)
> 
> #g <- gstat(g, id = "Piezo", model = vgm(150, "Mat", 1350, 0.0, kappa
> = 1.9), fill.all = T)#
> g <- gstat(g, id = "Piezo", model = vgm(0.7, "Ste", 1300, 18, kappa =
> 1.9), fill.all = T)#
> g.fit <- fit.lmc(v.g, g, fit.lmc = TRUE, correct.diagonal = 1.01) #
> fit multivariable variogram model , fit.lmc = TRUE, correct.diagonal = 1.01
> g.fit
> plot(v.g, model = g.fit, main = "Fitted Variogram Models - Raw Data")#
> #gridded(covariates) <- TRUE
> g.cok <- predict(g.fit, newdata = covariates)#grid
> 
> g.cok.pred <- g.cok using data$Piezo.pred
> aaaa <- na.omit(g.cok.pred)
> g.cok.coords <- g.cok using coords
> g.cok.out <- as.data.frame(cbind(g.cok.coords, g.cok.pred))
> colnames(g.cok.out)[1:2] <- c("X", "Y")
> coordinates(g.cok.out) = ~ X + Y
> gridded(g.cok.out) <- TRUE
> spplot(g.cok.out, main = list(label = "Hydraulic head with
> Co-kriging", cex = 1.5))
> 
> ###########################################################################################################################
> 
> I am unable to understand why the first map appears as a raster and
> the second not, notwithstanding the fact that they are both computed
> on the same "covariates" DEM???
> 
> where is the mistake???
> 
> regards
> 
> emanuele
> 
> ________________________________________________________
> Emanuele Barca                               Researcher
> Water Research Institute                       (IRSA-CNR)
> Via De Blasio, 5                       70123 Bari (Italy)
> Phone +39 080 5820535               Fax  +39 080 5313365
> Mobile +39 340 3420689
> _________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-Geo mailing list
> R-sig-Geo using r-project.org
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
> 

-- 
Edzer Pebesma
Institute for Geoinformatics
Heisenbergstrasse 2, 48151 Muenster, Germany
Phone: +49 251 8333081

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pEpkey.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 2472 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-sig-geo/attachments/20190810/b5cb9d77/attachment.bin>